The Colstrip, Montana power plant supplies energy to many other places than just the state Montana which it lies in. The power supply goes as far and Washington and Oregon. Shutting down two of the four towers would not only affect the people in Colstrip losing their jobs but also people who get power from the plant. Overall shutting down the plant would affect anybody who in contact with the power plant.
One big thing that would happen when two of the four towers are forced to shut down is many people would lose their jobs. As said by Republican State Sen. Duane Ankeney, who also represents the remote region of Colstrip in the Montana Legislature has stated that "When we lose 300 to 400 living-wage jobs, you don't go out the next day and find new ones" (Geranios). With that many people losing their jobs in Colstrip, Montana would be devastating to not only that family but the town. The town would end of losing all those workers and their families if they had any that reside there because they will not be able to find another job in the small town of Colstrip. The people who end up losing their jobs from the two of the four towers closing are not going to be able to just go out the next day and find another job. This is a problem because if they have a family to support they are going to have a hard time doing that if there is no income to do that. Overall with that many people losing their jobs not only will the workers themselves suffer but there families and the town of Colstrip in which many of them reside.
Coal-fired power plants are a reliable source of power unlike many of the other types of power that could possibly the new source of power out of Colstrip. The kind of energy sources that have been brought up to possibly install to be able to shut down half of the power plant are not as reliable as coal is. Tom Lutey who wrote an article for the Billings Gazette has stated in his article that “Utilities are developing plans to phase out coal power, through energy conservation and using cleaner energy sources like wind, solar and hydropower dams” (Lutey). These are all power sources that are cleaner for the environment but are not reliable like coal is. The power sources listed above in the quote all depend on nature to supply them with what they need to be able to produce power. Hydropower dams are a great idea but you need great bodies of water to do this and there are none near Colstrip, Montana. There are also already dams built to in lakes to supply energy. Tom Lutey also states that “Puget Sound Electric gets 33 percent of its power from coal. Avista Corp. in Eastern Washington gets 19 percent if its power from coal, more in the dry months when Columbia River dams don’t deliver much” (Lutey). This being said the dams depend on nature to help them make energy and without Colstrip power plant as a backup energy source for Washington they would not have power. The wind and solar energy sources are also a good idea to be able to keep the environment cleaner but they are also unreliable. Wind plants that have been built in Montana need a lot of wind to keep them going to produce power. The wind does not always blow and so when the wind does not blow there will be no source of energy to rely on. Solar power is a smart idea to be able to keep the environment clean also, but it is also unreliable like the other two sources. Solar power needs the sun to shine to be able to produce any energy and as it is now the sun doesn’t shine everyday, it can be covered up by clouds and then there would be no source of energy. Overall these are a cleaner way of getting energy but unlike coal which is reliable they are not.
The power plant in Colstrip Montana does not just supply energy to the state it is in but to surrounding states also. The energy goes all the way to Washington state and farther. Andrew Graham a reporter for National Geographic states that “lawmakers in Washington state—which gets power from the plant—could vote to shutter two of its four units” (Graham). Without Washing state having another plan for power closing two of the four units would not be helping them at all. The lawmakers need to come up with a plan for new power before they vote to shutter two of the four towers. Overall the the power plant being voted to shut down two of its four towers does not only affect Montana but wherever the power reaches to such as Washington state.
Power plants are expensive to keep running and making energy and some are more expensive that others. Talen Energy states that “The plant consistently ranked as one of the lowest-cost fuel plants in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council” (“Colstrip Power Plant”). When other plants are being ranked to be higher-cost fuel plant then the other plants need to be looked at closer and need to be considered to be shut down. The Colstrip power plant being ranked as one of the lower-cost fuel plants should be looked at a little more carefully in the decision if it is producing energy for less money compared to other power plants. The power plants that are costing more should have a closer look at them and the lawmakers voting to close two of the four units need to take into consideration that this is a power plant making a lot of energy for a lower cost.
One big thing that would happen when two of the four towers are forced to shut down is many people would lose their jobs. As said by Republican State Sen. Duane Ankeney, who also represents the remote region of Colstrip in the Montana Legislature has stated that "When we lose 300 to 400 living-wage jobs, you don't go out the next day and find new ones" (Geranios). With that many people losing their jobs in Colstrip, Montana would be devastating to not only that family but the town. The town would end of losing all those workers and their families if they had any that reside there because they will not be able to find another job in the small town of Colstrip. The people who end up losing their jobs from the two of the four towers closing are not going to be able to just go out the next day and find another job. This is a problem because if they have a family to support they are going to have a hard time doing that if there is no income to do that. Overall with that many people losing their jobs not only will the workers themselves suffer but there families and the town of Colstrip in which many of them reside.
Coal-fired power plants are a reliable source of power unlike many of the other types of power that could possibly the new source of power out of Colstrip. The kind of energy sources that have been brought up to possibly install to be able to shut down half of the power plant are not as reliable as coal is. Tom Lutey who wrote an article for the Billings Gazette has stated in his article that “Utilities are developing plans to phase out coal power, through energy conservation and using cleaner energy sources like wind, solar and hydropower dams” (Lutey). These are all power sources that are cleaner for the environment but are not reliable like coal is. The power sources listed above in the quote all depend on nature to supply them with what they need to be able to produce power. Hydropower dams are a great idea but you need great bodies of water to do this and there are none near Colstrip, Montana. There are also already dams built to in lakes to supply energy. Tom Lutey also states that “Puget Sound Electric gets 33 percent of its power from coal. Avista Corp. in Eastern Washington gets 19 percent if its power from coal, more in the dry months when Columbia River dams don’t deliver much” (Lutey). This being said the dams depend on nature to help them make energy and without Colstrip power plant as a backup energy source for Washington they would not have power. The wind and solar energy sources are also a good idea to be able to keep the environment cleaner but they are also unreliable. Wind plants that have been built in Montana need a lot of wind to keep them going to produce power. The wind does not always blow and so when the wind does not blow there will be no source of energy to rely on. Solar power is a smart idea to be able to keep the environment clean also, but it is also unreliable like the other two sources. Solar power needs the sun to shine to be able to produce any energy and as it is now the sun doesn’t shine everyday, it can be covered up by clouds and then there would be no source of energy. Overall these are a cleaner way of getting energy but unlike coal which is reliable they are not.
The power plant in Colstrip Montana does not just supply energy to the state it is in but to surrounding states also. The energy goes all the way to Washington state and farther. Andrew Graham a reporter for National Geographic states that “lawmakers in Washington state—which gets power from the plant—could vote to shutter two of its four units” (Graham). Without Washing state having another plan for power closing two of the four units would not be helping them at all. The lawmakers need to come up with a plan for new power before they vote to shutter two of the four towers. Overall the the power plant being voted to shut down two of its four towers does not only affect Montana but wherever the power reaches to such as Washington state.
Power plants are expensive to keep running and making energy and some are more expensive that others. Talen Energy states that “The plant consistently ranked as one of the lowest-cost fuel plants in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council” (“Colstrip Power Plant”). When other plants are being ranked to be higher-cost fuel plant then the other plants need to be looked at closer and need to be considered to be shut down. The Colstrip power plant being ranked as one of the lower-cost fuel plants should be looked at a little more carefully in the decision if it is producing energy for less money compared to other power plants. The power plants that are costing more should have a closer look at them and the lawmakers voting to close two of the four units need to take into consideration that this is a power plant making a lot of energy for a lower cost.